The availability of art images through Wikimedia and other openly accessible sources is often defined and controlled by license agreements and institutional policies asserted by museums and even libraries that hold the original art collections. Re-evaluation and critical examination of policies that will enable museums to better contribute to and use Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, and for the Wikimedia community to benefit from the expertise in museums. This session will provide a close look at rules, guidelines and examples that can be clarified to order to promote active engagement between the keepers of the collections and the scholars, publishers, and other members of the public who seek to benefit from them.

How can we reformat our cities and public spaces – and the architectures and technologies within them — as sites of collaboration and innovation? This presentation examines the ways in which WiFi enables the formation of networks of socio-technical spaces that reconﬁgure people, work and forms of organizing based on a year-long empirical research project. This presentation will also report on an ongoing collaborative design project, Breakout! Escape from the Office, which was presented by The Architectural League of New York as part of the Situated Technologies: Toward the Sentient City exhibition

To inquire further on the future of museums (and to answer to Nadine’s question) here is a video explaining a project that Google is organizing with the most famous museums around the world.

The original idea came out of a statement: most of the time visitors come out of a famous museum frustrated. They feel their experience was tarnished by the crowd, they did not get to see a masterpiece as weel as they wanted or they did not spend enough time watching it…

Why not providing visitors with a second chance to enjoy Art on the Web?

The team worked on a project based on an eye-tracking system, an adaptive technology device for measuring eye positions and eye movement; which allows people with limited or no bodily movement to use their eyes as controllers instead of the hands. They then developed a drawing program to be used with the eye-tracking system just for Tony’s needs, and the EyeWriter was born.

TemptOne wearingh the EyeWriter --- a tag from the 90s --- his first EyeTag

How it works

What Lieberman’s software does is interpret the movement of the eye’s pupil as the cursor on the screen of a program for drawing. The cursor moves as the pupil gazes over the screen, guiding it over the buttons and commands to select tools and draw. The movements are recorded by a single camera mounted on a pair of glasses, with infrared LEDs that illuminate the eye and create a dark pupil effect. The software reads the image from the camera and interprets the pupil as a black dot positioned on a grid, which can move as a mouse cursor that’s been guided with the eye instead of with the hand.

This program allows you to draw, manipulate and style a tag designed on the screen. Instead of point and click, it uses a time-based interface so that the “click” effect is triggered by focusing the eye on a position for a few seconds. This way the user selects/deselects commands and tools, and initiates/finishes the traces on the grid.

The program guides the user through the process of creating a tag, taking himstep by step through tracing the letters, their size, stroke, shadowing, coloring, and special effects. The final tags are saved into an FTP to be projected on a surface; only the tag isn’t just a static, finalized image being cast on the wall. Instead, the software repeats the process of how the tag was drawn, giving the effect of it being “live painted” on the wall.

DIY assistive technology.

The Eyewriter links two very different types of new media: art, and assistive technology (AT)– technology used by individuals with disabilities in order to perform functions that might otherwise be difficult or impossible, i.e. a wheelchair, a hearing aid, a screen reader or an artificial lung. In general, AT is very expensive and is linked to a costly process that includes highly specialized physicians, hospitalization and health insurance.

The Eyewriter offers an affordable alternative of DIY hardware and software that is open source. The price difference is huge: regular eyetracking systems go for no less than $7,000, like the Arrington Research Monocular Nystamus Laptop System, a device that consists of almost the same elements as the EW and that costs $7,998. The Eyewriter can be built for less than $50, depending on the quality of the material for the headset and the place where you buy the stuff.

Commercial tracker: $7,988 vs. EyeWriter: less than $50

Who is working at it right now?

Zach's class at Parsons working on their EW

The Ewewriter is an ongoing project under development. Zach’s students at Parson’s Collaboration Studios (collab.eyewriter.org) are working on it for the whole term, bringing different ideas and upgrades.

Just recently, one of the class members managed to control the computer’s cursor on the screen with the EW. This means a lot since it brings the EW a step forward to being useful for existing apps beyond the drawing program.

The main question: can it influence the field of assistive technology?

The answer is an absolute yes. The Eyewriter is gaining attention of AT developers, sellers and users alike. A lot of networking is going on around the project:

The developing team at eyewriter.org has been contacted by several hundreds of interested people.

Most of them are people that would like to use it for a loved one who is suffering from ASL or other kind of paralysis.

They have also been contacted by several ASL foundations.

There are a lot of people who would like to cooperate with the project, either by jumping in the design and programming, or with economic support.

The Veteran’s Authority also contacted Zach interested in the project, and he’ll be meeting with them nextApril in DC.

Mark Surabian, AT expert who has the only internet café for disabled people in NYC also contacted themandvisited the class at Parsons.They’re also meeting with the people at the “Open Prosthetics Project” at Duke

Robotagger uses the same language

University.

The “Graffiti Markup Language” that was created for the Eyewriter has now been used to develop theRobotagger, a robotic arm that can reproduce tags with markerdirectly on a surface.

What are the EyeWriter’s limitations?

“I want an eyetracker that works just like a mouse, or at least like my headmouse – able to move freely between any programs, navigating buttons, text, sliders, keyframe rubberbanding, continuous controller data, all WITHOUT modifying the applications. I love my tools and I’m going to miss them, no matter what…”

-NuJack, comic and multimedia artist.

The project is receiving a lot of feedback: through TemptOne’s use, the student’s work, and the suggestions from outside people that have contacted Zach after trying to develop their own.

-The main challenge for the EyeWriter is that, until now, you can’t get it to control other software; it can only be used with the drawing program that was designed for. This means that it can’t substitute a headmouse, –which is what NuJack uses for now, since he has full movement of his head– and that can navigate you through any kind of application. Using the eyes for complex programs (such as Photoshop) is almost impossible—the EW needs larger buttons in order to adapt to the eye’s jittery movements, never as precise as the hand’s.

-There are a lot of people interested in the project, but as Zack Lieberman explained, it is very hard to manage a community that is very diverse in what it has to offer, the level of expertise and is also geographically disperse.

-Even though the software can be understood by a tech expert, it needs to be made even easier and more user friendly, not as intimidating.

What comes next?

-Improve both the hardware and software. The headset is designed for Tony, who can’t move his head. The next step is to adapt it so that people who can move their heads can also use it. This means finding a way to calibrate both the pupil and the head movement.

-Actively work with a ALS patient in NYC. That will help the development since Tony is in LA and it makes it so much harder to get immediate feedback.

-DIY Eyewriter kits—once the device is substantially improved, the developers would like to put together kits that contain all the necessary materials to build the EW. That would allow for a much lower unit price since the materials would be bought in bulk and they would be of proven quality.

Conclusions

“When Mark Surabian visited the class, he said something I personally found very touching, that the key to assistive tech is “empathy not sympathy”

–Zach Lieberman

That is the main challenge with the EyeWriter: to truly understand what the patient needs in order to develop assistive technology that effectively covers the necessity. It has been very successful for TemptOne’s tagging needs because it was designed exactly for him. As NuJack puts it, “when they went to make TEMPT1′s graffiti rig, they were building it from the ground up…that’s why it works!” Zach agrees with that: every case of paralysis is different and every patient has different communication needs.

The long-term goal is to create a professional/social network of software developers, hardware hackers and ALS patients from around the world who are using local materials and open source research to creatively connect and develop eyetracking systems. The idea is to make the EW code so accessible and the hardware so easy to build that each person can adapt it to their patient’s needs.

“Without the proper team in place i fear endless frustration. it may well be that in a year’s time i will be corresponding with you using a (limited) eyetracker, reduced to relating solely through text, my multimedia empire nothing but a fond memory.”

So, after my excitement over the Eyewriter and its possibilities as artistic technology toned down a bit (and Mushon’s useful input), I focused my research on a different angle: its great possibilities as a communication tool for people that have lost this ability, either by ALS or any other kind of paralysis.

It links two very different types of new media: art and assistive technology (AT)– technology used by individuals with disabilities in order to perform functions that might otherwise be difficult or impossible. i.e. a wheelchair, a hearing aid, a screen reader or an artificial lung. The Eyewriter has linked the subversive, colorful, cool world of graffiti with the often dry and no-nonsense field of medical technology. Not your usual combination.

In general, high-tech medical hardware belongs to the very expensive world of state of the art health care. As we know, this is not widely available and is linked to a costly process that includes highly specialized physicians, hospitalization and health insurance.

The Eyewriter is based on the eye tracking system, a piece of AT that already existed. One of the most prestigious manufacturers of eye tracking systems is Arrington Research, a company that used to be part of a technology transfer initiative at the MIT. One of their products is the Monocular Nystamus Laptop System, which looks somewhat like this:

Arrington Research's system

In essence, not extremely different from the Eyewriter: a camera mounted on a headset, connected to software that is installed on a computer (not included) that records and interprets the pupil movements.

EyeWriter diagram-- formed by cheap components

But there is a huge difference– the price.

Arlington Research's eye tracking, $7,998 Pricey? Yes.

The Monocular system goes at $7,998. The Eyewriter, on the other hand, can be (almost) homemade—you need someone who has knowledge in programming (easier to find and cheaper than a specialized physician), a webcam ($20), a pair of sunglasses ($5), developed camera film ($10), wire, tape & other basic hardware items ($15)—all can go for less than 50 bucks. The team that developed the software has made it open source and posted some great video tutorials on their site.

The Eyewriter definitely has gotten a lot of attention from the graffiti community, and it’s also making some good noise in the medical/A.T. world, as well as with ALS patients.

Zach Lieberman has shared some great news: that several eye-tracking companies and some great experts in assistive technology are already in contact with them [such as the ITU GazeGroup, a research group at the IT University of Copenhagen that focuses in finding accessible alternatives for gaze tracking systems and bring them to the mainstream] as well as some ALS foundations and a lot of potential users and their families.

NewJack

A very well known case of ALS is Stephen Hawking’s, although I think he hasn’t heard about the Eyewriter… yet But NewJack has, a film editor/ video artist/ photographer/ painter/ musician who was recently diagnosed with it. He has continued doing all of his amazing work aided by AT: visual art, video, original composition, comics, and a long, impressive etcetera. He has contacted Eyewriter.org and is one of the many patients who are sharing their ideas for further developing the project.

I have now contacted both NewJack and the GazeGroup, and hope to get direct input soon . I’ll also be meeting Zach Lieberman in the following days. As you can see, the live reporting for this project isn’t so direct since stuff is happening mainly outside the web (and outside NYC) and being known about after it has happened. Still, I’m on it and will surely get some more answers… stay tuned.

Guys! There’s so much artwork taking on new media… I want to research one good project that throws some light in how the combination between art and new media is shaping new aesthetic trends.

Please help me choose AND broaden the dimension for live reporting. Any ideas are much appreciated.

1. EyeWriter

This project is mainly conducted by Zach Lieberman, NYC based artist and teacher at Parsons. About him: “His work uses technology in a playful and enigmatic way to explore the nature of communication and the delicate boundary between the visible and the invisible. He creates performances, installations, and on-line works that investigate gestural input, augmentation of the body, and kinetic response.”

Temptone graffiti, pre paralysis

He has an amazing project called EyeWriter–he co-designed an eye-tracking system to help a graffiti artist and friend of his, Tony Quan (aka Temptone) who has paralysis resulting from sclerosis, to draw using only his eyes.Late last year, artists from around the world met to develop the (low-cost, open-source) software and tools to that enabled Temptone to draw his tag again after more than 5 years.

Phase 2 of the EyeWriter project began last August. The long-term goal is to create a professional/social network of software developers, hardware hackers, urban projection artist and ALS patients from around the world who are using local materials and open source research to creatively connect and make eye art.

My travelogue would consist on further research on EyeWriter—what is going on right now? how has the project evolved? I would, of course, try to contact Zack Lieberman. I know that the Parsons Communication, Technology + Design program is involved in the project, so the idea would be to establish a link and do fieldwork .

2. DRAWN- an installation for hands and ink

ANOTHER great project by Zack Lieberman (yes, I’m becoming obsessed). This project presents a scenario in which painted ink forms appear to come to life, rising off the page and interacting with the hands that drew them. How it works: “custom-developed software alters a video signal in real time, creating a seamless, organic and even magical world of spontaneous and improvised performance of hand and ink.” In the installation, visitors are invited to become performers themselves, learning how to utilize the system in order paint and then tap, nudge and poke the ink across the paper.

Take a look:

I would like to know where is the installation now, how has the project developed? How has it influenced other new media artists? What are the limitations of the medium? How does it allow the artist from an aesthetic perspective? If it is open source, who else has worked on it, and how have they used it?

3. Real-time data visualizations

There are a lot of art projects that fuel on data provided in real time by internet users- many of them are based on Twitter feeds because it’s a reliable source of real-time info feed. The visualizations have taken different aesthetic forms that we’ve all seen- cloudlike formations, rhizomes, grids, etc, and artists are generating new graphics and visual representations. I would like to further explore this. What does real-time data allow the artist to do from an aesthetic perspective? Is there something about the real time nature of data that creates or hints new visual standards? Where do we see these types of visualizations entering spaces beyond the computer screen? Are they influencing back more traditional artforms?

I’d like to base my travelogue on the project TweetCatcha, by Bruce Drummonds – new media artist, designer, coder and musician currently studying an MFA in Design and Technlogy at Parsons. TweetCatcha seeks to uncover the organic nature of news as it travels through Twitter over time, by examining the movement of NY Times articles through Twitter.

Anyway, any feedback is much appreciated– especially on how to keep it LIVE (as in real time).

My interest in the potential relationship between the arts and new media ignited this travelogue two weeks ago. The aim was to see:

1. In which ways do cultural organizations (CO) actually use or collaborate with new media,

2. How do those practices help them expand their audiences inside and outside their geographical area of influence,

3. Can this new media prove to be a useful tool in breaching cultural divides, by offering access to a more diverse audience; and

4. Which of these new practices can be accommodated within a limited budget.

Since the task seemed way too broad to cover in two weeks’ work, I tried to narrow the search by focusing on point 1, and then analyzing and understanding the pros and cons of those existing practices while keeping in mind points 2-4 as questions to aid my research process.

My first searches showed that a very wide range of cultural institutions are interacting with digital media. The majority of the activities that arts institutions are engaging into can be categorized in two large groups: SOCIAL MEDIA and USER GENERATED CONTENT.

I. SOCIAL MEDIA

The most popular activity for a CO, by far. In personal experience I’ve encountered a lot or resistance to venturing into uncontrolled terrain, so it was great to see that there’s an increasing interest to know what exactly SM can do for COs. There’s quite a lot of research being conducted on the topic—both by marketing or PR consultants such as Marc van Breeand Devon Smith, as well as by arts advocators, news reporters and other types of cultural analysts. It was great to see that this field of knowledge is open to networking and conversation, and there’s a lot of information being generously shared online.

Overview:

-They are used mainly for marketing purposes: more visibility and hopes of free, self-generated publicity.

-Everyone is doing it. Almost any CO with a web page engages in some kind of SM: a blog; Facebook profile or fan page; Twitter account or in more sophisticated cases, FB Connect or YouTube channel.

-According to Smith, COs should concentrate on the 3 stars of Social Media:

And completely forget about MySpace, Flickr and Blogs

-Going back to Shirky’s levels of participation, these activities only rank on the basic stage of sharing. Activity is usually limited to publishing status, using the ‘like’ FB feature, tweeting, and rating videos.

Pros:

-It provides the CO with a lot of information virtually for free. Paraphrasing Mushon on Dan’s post: “this is PR paradise … by becoming a fan, you gave your contact and demographic details; you’ve advertised to your friend and placed (essentially) an ad on your profile page.”

-It exponentially multiplies their online visibility. According to FB and some of its reviewers, FB Connect blows up traffic, engagement and registration to the sites up to 200%

Cons: Almost nobody knows exactly why or how they’re doing it—as shown by a very useful study by Marc van Bree on orchestras’ usage of social media, there’s an urgent need for COs to plan their SM strategies: his recommendations focus on formalization of goals, as well as strategic planning of the budget, people and strategy needed to accomplish them. Smith proposes setting goals and monitoring success depending on the platform.

II. USER GENERATED CONTENT

I found creative, original programs that COs are constantly launching through the same platforms (FB, Twitter, YouTube) to engage their followers in activities that generate online content. (See Twitter Community Choreography and We Tell Storiesfor two cool examples).

Overview- Less popular and more complicated than just recruiting followers, projects that attract users into more engaged participation are becoming more common.

Pros-

-Getting followers to devote time and energy to a project definitely engages them deeper with the institution & strengthens relationships and loyalty.

-I believe it is an effective way of bringing art closer to specific groups that are more likely to be active on the Web than on real-life cultural activities, such as attending exhibits.

-The projects themselves can be high quality ideas with great possibilities—perhaps the richest field of interaction that actually exists between culture and the Web.

-If used correctly, these activities can be useful tools to help develop analytical abilities that would result in a more critical audience.

Cons- Although these projects can result in interesting content, there is an essential step missing that would bolster audience online participation into actual real-life engagement as art consumers. I totally agree with Mushonin the risk of users “no longer com(ing) [to these institutions] to ‘be exposed to art’ they come to create art, to be seen, heard… This is great but this is not the mission statement of most of these organizations, and that should be acknowledged.”

These online interactive projects are usually left on a basic level of results, without generating a bigger payoff for the organization by helping it promote its work, generate substantial audience growth, obtain new members and/or funding, etc. The activities they host attract a group of people that won’t necessarily turn into audiences that attend their events. I believe that this is result of the lack of planning and strategy shown in van Bree and Smith’s studies.

WHAT TO DO?

I believe that both social media and user generated content are amazing tools for expanding audiences through cultural divides with a small budget, in a way that truly brings people closer to consuming artistic products. Shifting from consumption to sharing and producing is fine as long as it doesn’t distract the public’s attention from the actual content that the CO is trying to deliver. As with any other marketing tactic, online activity should aim at making the audience cross the virtual line into real life consumption—being it online or offline, depending on the organization’s nature.

The process should be engaging followers/fans in creative activity that is indivisibly connected to the consumption of the organization’s main avocation.

Finally, I found an excellent example of how this can be successfully achieved– the Royal Opera House’s “Twitteropera.”the ROH summoned their users and fans into participating on the creation of a complete opera script through short, 140-character contributions @youropera. All the tweets submitted were worked through by a scriptwriter, then handed to a composer and finally staged on two presentations. The whole process took 1 month and engaged 1900 users on Twitter. The complete ROH media combo was engaged in a marketing strategy: the tweets were constantly being worked into the script, which was updated weekly on their blog. The audience was guided throughout the process to produce what the organizers needed: comic relief, more drama, or a strong conclusion.They taped the dress rehearsals, produced teasers and generated a lot of expectation through traditional and new media. Tickets were free for both presentations, and those who participated had the option of being interviewed for TV on the day of the event. Audience was encouraged to photograph or record the staging and to share it with the ROH to be uploaded into their webpage. They generated a lot of buzz, audience participation, free media coverage and actual, live audience enjoying two sold-out shows.

In all, social media offers great possibilities for low budget arts institutions to broaden and diversify their audiences. The nature of each Cultural Organization dictates the possibilities of Social Media, and it is not an automatic process. In all cases, it requires:

Setting clear goals

Knowing the platforms: their different languages, possibilities and risks

Structuring a comprehensive strategy that includes several platforms

Establishing mechanisms that engage the audience and are indivisibly linked to the Organization’s main purpose

Maximizing the results by generating buzz both on traditional and new media

Ok, so following Mushon’s sound advice, I tried to focus my research in:

1) Finding what collaborations between new media and the Arts exist out there.

2) After that, the next step is to evaluate what has worked well and which problems do exist and need to be changed—and also evaluate which applications/ideas can be adapted to a lesser-wired context.

What I’ve found so far I’ve can be divided in three main usages:

1. User-generated content/interaction projects

Most of the projects that I found rely on engaging the audience (old and new) into generating new content; through social media like Tweeter or Facebook, their mobile phones, or the web. The projects go across all art genres:

DANCE– Check out Twitter Community Choreography: an ongoing experiment from Dance Theater Workshop. On Tuesdays, they ask their Twitter followers to send one movement (or nonmovement), to form a choreography. They put all the responses together and engage the audience into choosing the order in which the moves should be interpreted, and afterwards they ask them to participate in the music and sound editing. The final result is executed by a professional dancer and filmed.

LITERATURE— Another super cool project is Penguin’s “We Tell Stories”- they challenged some of their top selling authors to create new forms of story, designed specially for the internet. Over six weeks writers created tales “that take full advantage of the immediacy, connectivity and interactivity” The stories are targeted for young people and have different styles and levels of interaction. “The 21 Steps”, for example, is a homage to “The 39 Steps” in a story that must be followed around the world through Google Maps. In other stories the author would do a real-time writing of the story on a blog-type app, one hour each night for a week; or a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure type of story where the reader makes the decisions. A cool catch is a contest that involved a seventh story hidden through the web, with clues both online and in the real world that led the readers to win prizes.

2. Access to archives

Besides YouTube and Hulu, there are many resources that offer great quality content totally or almost free. Two great findings:

FILM— Less than a year ago, Japanese director Akira Kurosawa’s archive was completely uploaded and disclosed on the Web for anyone to enjoy. Screenplays, photos, his beautiful watercolor storyboards, drawings, notes, newspaper clippings, etc can be accessed for free .

The guys from The Auteurs (if you haven’t yet, definitely join) have managed to offer super good quality streaming for tons of high-quality movies, either for free or for as little as $1.

3. Social media—on the side findings.

Although it may not seem very exciting, for me it was a treasure to find a super useful study conducted by Marc van Bree, http://mcmvanbree.com/about.htm#resume a top PR and MKT man for the arts, who actually put the effort into gathering information and in-depth interpretation of a pool of 81 orchestras—which can basically can be traduced into most types of cultural institutions.

It is not news that social media is a powerful tool for gaining advocacy, branding, funding and general diffusion of any topic. But in my experience, arts institutions have been very slow in incorporating this new media to their communication and marketing strategies. One important element is the lack of feedback and research on social media & the arts impact and concrete results. To that, this study proves to be an invaluable tool for gaining support and budget from high executives in arts organizations.

This is what I found more interesting from many other sites, but am still looking for examples that help delivery of existing content into new audiences. I also found that I need to improve my search skills because I need to get more time-efficient. Sorry to post this late today!

High art should not lower down and mess up with technology: the purists would faint at the mere thought!What, Mozart in YouTube? Picasso’s profile on Facebook? The Metropolitan Opera leaving its sacred marble temple to show in movie theaters across the globe? Oops. I guess that’s been done!

How can the new media collaborate with cultural organizations in general to help them reach larger audiences and breach geographical and cultural divides, within a limited budget?

New digital media allows us to do what we never thought we could: shorten distances, experience several situations at a time, and participate in events that take place miles away. I haven’t found it yet, but I am sure that someone out there is using 360º cameras, live streaming, interactive mapping or HD television to blow up the possibilities of a great event, art exhibitor local tradition. I want to find out what is going on, but here’s the catch: I want to see if it can work in a country that is not completely wired and over-connected. The Met and the National Theatre have figured it out, but there must be affordable ways of mixing culture and new media.

Hi, everyone. I am happy to join this conversation as the newest addition to this Topics in Digital Media class– Quick presentation: My name is Jimena Lara, second-semester MCC student from Mexico City. My general background is in Communication and Cultural Public Policy. I’ve been working in different areas of Mexico’s Ministry of Culture for the past few years: mainly in cultural project development in general, grants and scholarships for the arts; and marketing for the performing arts.

My experience there has shown me how technology’s role within the Arts has become increasingly important; both as means and platforms for creation, and as a priceless tool for marketing, communication and cultural advocacy– especially in a country with such diverse cultural needs as Mexico.

I would like my first plunge into digital travel to go down this path. I believe that there are awesome possibilities of making arts organizations and new media join in an amazing, firework-deserving, explosive relationship. Some of the issues that I’d like to explore are:

1. Outreach–

Unlike the United States, cultural policy in Mexico is mainly a governmental issue. The majority of the cultural institutions and the education and cultural policies are under the control of the Federal and Local Governments through the National Council for Culture and the Arts; and the vast majority of cultural institutions (all of the archeological sites and most of the museums and concert halls, as well as the main orchestras, dance and theatre companies, etc.) are financed with public funds.

Therefore, it is a primary objective and responsibility to make culture and the Arts as accessible as possible for the whole country. This means reaching an extremely diverse population (both socially and economically) with, of course, a very limited (actually, shrinking) budget. The sizzling urban centers might be bustling with theater, film and museums, but also the small rural towns in the middle of the mountains, the jungle or the desert need to be taken into account and their own cultural expressions to find a spot in the national stage.

How can digital media help to establish a true cultural dialogue between urban and rural? What possibilities does it offer for crossing the multi-language barrier in a country with 62 indigenous tongues? In the world of streaming and 360º cameras, distance should be a much lesser problem, right?

2. New audience formation–

In order to survive, any cultural institution needs to keep reaching for different segments of the population and engage new audiences in its offers. Digital media can prove to offer amazing tools to interest the younger generations, as well as other alternative, highly politicized or underground communities.

3. Digital marketing and publicity–

I can’t say if it’s a wider phenomenon, but least in Mexico the tendency of cultural organizations (both public, private and non-for-profit) is to focus their advertising and marketing efforts mostly on the media that they have known for so long: newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, flyers, posters, and billboards. In my experience, the older and more ‘respectable’ the institution is, the more it doubts the effectiveness of digital alternatives of advertising. Furthermore, they seem to tremble at the mere thought of opening their websites to the uncontrollable world of social media (“but what if someone criticizes us and everybody reads it?”). Although traditional media does give positive results, there is no questioning the impact of digital media and, particularly, social networking as a faster, much cheaper means of publicity and circulation. I’d like to further explore the communication strategies that have worked for local art institutions.